Fayette County Insider - Schools

Desegregation Court Order

The court-ordered desegregation plan that still applies to the operation of the county’s public school system is the result of a class action lawsuit filed on June 2, 1965, in the United States District Court for the Western District Of Tennessee, Western Division.

The case is known as “McFerren & United States v. County Board of Education of Fayette County.” John McFerren Jr. was the first name in the list of 50 plaintiffs that included 37 black children and 13 of their parents. The named children were representative of the class of all black children in Fayette County at the time.

On Sept. 15, 1965, the United States joined the suit as a plaintiff-intervenor. In this capacity, U.S. attorneys with the Department of Justice can file motions and participate in the case just like the original plaintiffs.

The suit alleged that the School Board was operating a compulsory bi-racial school system consisting of a primary system of elementary and high schools limited to attendance by white children and a secondary system of such schools limited to attendance by Negro children. Bus transportation was also segregated.

A dual set of school zone lines and bus routes were used and overlapped where black and white school children lived in the same residential area.

Race and color were said to be the sole basis for the assignment of children, faculty and staff to schools.

The “white” schools were described as generally modern, well-equipped and well-staffed, with adequate physical facilities and fairly up-to-date curricula, textbooks and educational programs.

In contrast, the “black” schools were characterized as sub-standard, inadequately or under-staffed, and poorly equipped. They either completely lacked or had inadequate libraries, cafeterias, health and other minimum building facilities. They also had inadequate and/or out-dated academic facilities, curricula, textbooks, educational and extra-curricular or recreational programs.

These photographs are included in the complaint filed for McFerren v Board of Education to show the poor quality of the schools that black children were required to attend in 1965..

The plaintiffs claimed that for nearly 11 years the School Board had been on notice that its policy and practice of compulsory racial segregation were unconstitutional and that it had an “affirmative duty to desegregate” the school system.

The Court was asked to enjoin the School Board from continuing to operate a bi-racial school system. In addition, the plaintiffs sought a desegregation plan that would reorganize the entire school system into a unitary, non-racial system beginning with the 1965-66 school year.

After many motions, orders and objections, Boyd decreed on June 21, 1966, that the School Board was permanently enjoined from discriminating on the basis of race or color in the operation of the school system and should take steps to eliminate the effects of past racial discrimination.

His consent decree established a desegregation plan that contained an “annual freedom of choice of schools.” The “choice” was to be exercised by a parent, guardian or the student himself during the month of March preceding the school year for which the choice was to apply.

No official, principal, teacher or employee of the school system was permitted to advise, recommend or otherwise influence any individual in the exercise of their choice. No one was to be favored or penalized because of the choice they made.

Once a choice had been exercised, it could not be changed for the entire school year. The only exceptions allowed were compelling hardship, change of residence, the availability at another school of a special needs, or the availability at another school of a required course of study not offered at the school originally chosen.

No choices could be denied in assigning students to schools for any reason other than overcrowding. When overcrowding would result, the students who lived closest to the school were to be assigned to it without regard to race, color or national origin.

Transportation was ordered to be provided to all students to the school of their choice. The routing and scheduling of transportation was to be planned on the basis of non-racial factors such as economy and efficiency.

Wherever feasible, inferior schools were to be brought up to the standards previously maintained for white students. If improvements were not feasible, the schools were to be closed as soon as possible. A program of school consolidation and equalization had already been underway for a few years preceding the decree.

Remedial programs for students who had attended inferior schools were ordered to assist the students in overcoming past inadequacies in their education.

The School Board was directed to desegregate the faculty and staff. Consideration of race, color or national origin was to be eliminated as a factor in hiring, assignment to schools, dismissal, demotion or passing over for retention, promotion or rehiring.

In addition, reports to the Court were required showing statistics for each “choice” period, student transfers, faculty statistics, and any steps or programs instituted for school equalization.

The Court retained jurisdiction in the case for the purpose of making such other or further orders as might become necessary.

The docket for McFerren is 15-and-a-half pages long, with entries ranging from June 2, 1965, to April 17, 1985. The case file fills up four storage boxes.

As noted in the Jan. 28, 2008, letter from the U.S. attorney Kym Rogers, who is currently assigned to the case, there should be several recent entries on the docket and more pleadings in the case file.

The 11 years preceding the filing of McFerren, cited in the complaint as when the School Board was first put on notice to desegregate the county school system, referred to Brown v. Board of Education. That landmark school desegregation case was decided unanimously by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1954. It settled the question of whether or not blacks and whites could receive an education integrated with or separate from each other.

The decision in Brown overturned the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson case that had established the "separate but equal" doctrine, which said that separate public facilities of equal quality did not violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Brown v. Board of Education was filed on behalf of Linda Brown, an eight year old black girl. Although her white friends attended classes at a public school a few blocks from home, Brown had to attend an elementary school on the other side of Topeka, Kan. The Topeka school system was segregated based on race. Under the “separate but equal” doctrine, the arrangement was acceptable and legal.

Brown's parents sued in federal court on the basis that separate facilities for blacks were “inherently unequal.” The lower courts agreed with the school system. They found that if the facilities were equal, the child was being treated equally with whites, as the 14th Amendment required.

The Browns, along with families in other school systems, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. They argued that even physically equal facilities did not take into account "intangible" factors, and that segregation itself had a harmful effect on the education of black children.

The case was supported by the NAACP and was argued by Thurgood Marshall, who later became the first black justice on the Supreme Court.

View/Download Court Docket for McFerren v Board of Education (PDF 1,372kb)